Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Sep 19
th, 2017 at 4:13pm:
I don't - I merely say that the best solution is the middle way - if agreed to by a majority of the voting public in a binding vote - for a 'separate but equal' position for Gay Marriage or whatever it will be called, with it is clearly stated that this is a special issue and that churches have the unmitigated option to accept or reject it according to their conscience.
The gays (etc) have always lead life in a parallel universe - let them continue happily there.
Now - where are all these hard facts on all these gays worldwide committing suicide BECAUSE of 'marriage inequality'? It seems to me that if they are that unstable, especially any here in Australia (the only country we have any control over, BTW) before the vote is even counted, they were going to commit suicide anyway.
To respond, for the umpteenth tedious time, to your question - because marriage is defined as between a man and a woman - what the SSM YES lobby are seeking is inclusion, not equality, since they have equality already as regards marriage - any man may marry any woman and vice versa, and gays/lesbians etc have been doing so for centuries. The ONLY Right associated with the decision to Marry is to not be compelled to marry.the 'right to marry the person of your choice' is not open-ended, since it is bound by the definition above.
It doesn't matter that it doesn't directly affect anyone else - obviously it does in many cases, but let's leave that for now - the fact is that ssm does not fit the millennia old definition of marriage.
Now how many times am I going to have to explain that?
Second to that, traditionally, marriage was defined as an eternal union between a man and woman. Does that mean that if a man or woman remarries (unless his/her husband/wife has died), does that still comply with the millennia old definition of marriage? What is a person commits adultery, and then marries her/her adulterer? Is that still defined as marriage? What if a couple get married but don't have children (not because they can't but because they don't want to), should it still be considered 'marriage'?
Marriage has also traditionally been a religious institution. Does that mean that if a Christian and Muslim marry each other (without one converting to other) that they're technically not married?